LA TOOD I!, et al. vs. La Tondena, Inc., et al.

LA TOOD

• I!

__ ,

I'I~I'UIJLIC O'P' THg PHILIPPlN

, COURT OF TAX APPEALS WANll.A . ' Petitioner, - versus ..

C.T.A. CASE NO. 182

COLLECT(){

REVENUE.

L

e pondent.

,~~ \~ , x• • - ~ - - - - - - • - - •x ~y ·

N

D EC I~ 1

This is an appeal from t he decis on of the res- pondent Collector of Int ernal Revenue assessing nd demanding from the petitioner, La Tondena, Inc., the payment of the sum of ' 68,153. 73 as s~ec f_j_c t_ax on 391,396 proof liters of denatured alcohol produced by it during the period fr) July, 19~1 to ~ay, 19~4, inclusive, plus penalty in the amount of 10,000.00 for alleged !legal removal of alcohol from the place of product on w thout prepayment of the spec fie tax due thereon in violation of Sect on 124 in relation to actions 127 and 133, and penalized under Section 174 all of t e at!onal Internal avenue ode. The p tit!oner, La Ton na, Inc. is a corpora- tion duly organ zed and existing under the laws of the Philippines. As de fro the manufacture of wines and liquors, the petitioner 1& also a duly licensed rec- tifier of alcohol wh·ch is re ove from the place of original distillation without pr epayment of the spe- cific tax but under bond approved by the respondent conditioned upon petitioner' pay ent of the specific 651 • \[(). 182 tax that y be due on the finis ed roduct, as pro- vided for n ect on 129 of the T xCodo. tis also engaged in denatur ng ethyl alcohol f r the anuf c- ture of ru bing alcohol either for its own use or for sale to the public under the rand •Jai Ala!• ru bing alcohol or for the use of the d!ff rent r ntees of special for la • approved by th re u of nt rnal Revenue, for the anufacture of fuel , shellac. r bbing alcohol and other ro ucts s c!fled n the grantee' s permit.

In denaturing alcohol, the petitioner uses three formul as, n ly: (1) nder the en r 1 for 1 us ng thyl alcohol an pyri ine ases as ingre tents which composition is used for fuel or light) (2) under the special for 1~ using castor o 1, or than 1 an ur n1n solution, or e oth r ingredients Wh1c co osition used for the nu etur o shellac, woo dye, or fo some other n us ria rpo e ; ~nd (~) under t e spe• elal formulas en rat 1n t report (pp. l • l , rae.) of gents arian

• Uy

enane1o h ch are authorize y t • ure u of Intern 1 avenue.

fore denaturing the alcohol for each general or special for 1 , t pe itloner if for its o us • or the different ran s if or t ir o use, secur s first the approv 1 of the ollector of Int r al evenue. thereafter, a date i ixed or the enaturlng o he alcohol, and at the place and on the date and hour fixed, a denaturing co lttee composed of embers appointed by 652 •• r-.o. 182 - 3 - the oll ctor, from thre (3} to ftve (5) in nu. er, witness the pour ng of t ·ngr d ents p c1fied in the approv d for ul to the coho! , and th result- !ny co pound s th n c containers or dru s htch ar p nted n 1 ttercd \1 th t e 1nfor , tion aa ap cifie y th r u of nt r n 1 venue, d ·f- ferent ·n color fro the ru s us d for tax p3!d 1· cobol.

r su ject tt r oft pre ent ~ss ss ent nd de and re th d n tured lcohol used by th p titionor in the nuf cture oi ts •J

Al

u ing l eo ol and the lcohol sp call denatured by the pet t•o r nd sol cohol d n teated y evenue n ich is reco.rde •

Jun

P. Uy n at ion, th t l ffeaent purch s rs.

11 thy! ale hol n t i n 189° proof, and 11 th l• ere •nter d nt tiv t th Off c al gt t r oo •t on r nd t - nt rn 1 s Ace unt o w er n onlv d n t red alcohol re 24, 19 ' nternal v nu g nt ar ano c 0 v.

r ported, ft r du nv st • ro July, 1951 to v, 1954, t p t!tion r did ot pay the p c f c tax on 391 , 29 proof liters of ethyl cohol hich r enatured n e d ·n th pre- para lo of ru bing alcohol and oth r odic• 1 pr par - tiona, t , 1 p id th 7~ sal s on th al of the &aid pr parations. ih sp cif"c tax ue t r au co pute o 273,977.20, but n- 653 •

E

• 182 a y p d th sum of 5 1823.47 as sales tax, -che r~sp dent, on July 26, 1954, ssu d an ass ss nt and demand or the pay ent of the su of 268, 153.73 ssp cific t x on saia alcohol, plus the nt of .00 as p n lty, which assess nt an d nder r vi • the only quest·on to b cia d n th s pp a 1& wheth r or not th pe •t on r s ubj ct to the specific t x prescr· n ~1 in r lat on to ~•ction 1 , oth of the t n 1 Internal v nu Cod , - on its •3a! Al 1 r ng alcohol nd th sp c lly denatur d lcohol ·h ·ch t roduced nd arutfact red .n acco d nc 'J th sp c · 1 for 1 s for ts · ff r~nt custo ers.

The p rt nent pr vi ions f of the Tax C d rov!d s follo s :

"(a) If pro uced ro cocon t~ cass v , ca ot , fro the juice, yrup, or per pr of liter• s venty c •( ) If produced fro rials , per prco 1 ter, n pa, , or can , ny oth r L1Dt - n p sos.

•thla tax shall b propor ion lly in- creased for any strength of the pir ts taxed over oroof f~ft _ M 654 • • • • • 182 anuf ctured n pro c d by the petitioner herein, so of ic were us d y it in the anu f ac tu.re of it "Ja1 lai" rubDing alcohol an tho re t sold to t diffe:cent ante 1 iven per its y the Bureau of L&teroal ven,~e, are mgdicirial orgRarationt, th chief ln edient f which s distilled spir t s, nd ence u ject o e ecif c t x on di ti l ed spir ts. h f t in lry t erefor turns upon th an- in of the t r d c al pr parat ons~ and Atoilet ...

reparation "• fh f llow 9 deftnition ar In oint' dicin 1 preparation'- the term has aning n tra nd eo rce as c on &

Ch and 1

e criptive of and re- fers t o au stance used in die ne and re• pared or he use of t a othecary or phy• ci n to b d n tered as r edy n d - $0."

La 1ct1onary with ronounc1at1on, allant1n , h 1 pplne Edltion. M " he expre sion ' ed cin 1 prepar~t on' u ·n a iff ct arch , 1883, • 121, chedul A, 22 Stat. 494, n uch t cles as are of use or believed y tl pr scr er or user fairly nd honestly to e of use, cur·ng or allav ating or palliating or pr - nt so s se f ffect on of th hu an ra • ( ord Phrases, Vol. 2 •

p. 617.) • • ed!~ nal' tlve; uae f r the disorders.• ( or s 616.)

ns c r t ve or 11 v a- cur or llev atlon of bo y Phr s s, Vol. 2 , p.

655 =< Lr tt”

DECISION «

GeleAe CASE NO, 162 -6-« "“tfoilet waterc* - a perfumed liquid, usually weakly alcoholic, as cologne or Florida water, used in or after a bath, er as a freshner of the skin." (Webster's New International Dictionary, } “*Preparetion® is that which is pre pared, or something equipped or compounded for a partcular purpose." (Words & Phrases, Mir, Kectorino 5, Cruz, Pharmacist of the Reme Pharmaceutical Lavoratory, testified to the effect that denatured alcohol could be considered as medicinal preparation because it can be used as an antiseptic and inhibits the growth of bacteria (pp. 120-121, 135-138 Chief Pharmacist of the Quezon Institute (pp. 215-219 t.$.n.)3 by Dr, German Castillo, Resident Physician of the Philippine General Hospital (pp, 397-406 t.s.n.); by Dra, BasilfiaeZialcita Tanitngeo, Phermacist of the ‘teSen.). This view is shared by lirs, Clemencia de Dios, Philippine General Hospital (pp. 151©153 t.s.n.)3 and by Angel Arambulo, Pharmacist and Instructor of the College of oy np: University of the Philippines. (tsn p.178-180.)

In the light of the literal meaning of the term “medicinal preparation," and the opinion of experts as Stated above and considering that the Drug and Cosmetic Regulations has classified and considered alcohol as medicine (see 43 0,.G, No, 2, Feb. 1947, pp. 406-419), we hold therefore that the specially denatured alcohol manufactured and produced by the petitioner 4s a medic We shall now procéed to determine whether or not distilled spirits is the chief ingredient of the dena- 656

DECI IG «

CelAe CASE NO, 182

~ J

c + tured ethyl alcohol in question, Distilled spirits as defined in Section 133 of the Tax Code include: “all substances known as ethyl paves . ated oxide of ethyl, or spirits o es, which are comaonly produced by the fermentation and subsequent dist il= dation of grain, starch, molasses, or suger, or of Some syrup or »83Ps ing Thus, under this definition, ethyl aleohol is considered distilled spirits. Considering this statue tory definition and Ceneral Circular No, 468 of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, dated September 18, 1940, which states in part that “alcohol shall be considered the chief ingredfent of nedietnal preparations if after excluding water, alcohol constitutes more than SOs of the preparation by volume," we are of the opinion and $0 hold that the specially denatured alcoho] prepared and produced by the petitioner herein, some of which were used by it tn the uenufacture of its “Jai Alai" xubbing alcohol and the rest sold to its customers who used the same as rubbing alechel and for medical and surgical purposes, {s subject to the specific tax pres Gribed by Section 127 in relation to Section 133 of the Tax Code. A cursory perusal of the different formulas used by the petitioner, in making the spectally dena- tured adeohol supports thfs conclusion, Allthese for- malas show that ethyl elcchol which by express provie sion of law is classified as "distilled spirtts" is the chief <ingredient of said preparations. :

However, the petitioner contends thet for 4 pre-e paration the chief ingredient of which is distilled

O57

657 c.r.A.

• 182 - 8 - spirits to ,be subject to spec fie tax, the same must be potable or~ pable of being taken internally. , It argues t at since the denaturants us d render d the al~ohol unfit for internal ~ons pt!on, it follo s that the specially d natured alcohol cannot be con• sidered as distilled spirit& taxable un er ~ect on 127 in relation to ection 133 of the Tax Code. e are of the opin on that uch an interpret • tion 1s erroneous an farfet~h• • The law 1 eneral and apea s of • ..

di~ !nal and toilet preparations• and •all other preparations• of wh ch dlst lled spirits is the chief ingredient.

t oes not a any dt t net on but subjects su~h preparation alike to the pectfic dittloauere de- reov r, in the l o& t!on of the sp c fie tax on alcohol as a di~inal prep tion, th c cu st nc of whether it is c pa 1 of oral lnt or n ernal con• sumption is not taken into account. It is uffic!ent that al~ohol has b n anuf ct red and produced, and the specifi~ tax thereon lately tt ch e.

(Sec. 124, • I. .c. )

• The pat tio r lso aint t th t th lcohol 1n que&tion was used for in ustries n s th refore x pt from specific tax un er act on 128 of the T x Cod which reads as foll a tic not 658

I

E

• 182 - - roof (ninoty p~r centum a solute alco• P ol) , , 1!.un d natcre , be \'ii t dJ..·a fro a registered distillery or bonded ~r otts of t o t ller or of the ov rn nt thout the p ymcnt o h ~ pec · f c tax P~'scr b d . n soct on 133, fo t purpose of be!n u ad or f · 1, or 1• ht , or r u~ ( e r ly · 1 t c arts nd ndustr ea.

e f nd petttion r ' s ~ cont tion unten ble and 1 hout e:it, and on tho contrnry, e e !eve that th exe t on under ct on 128 of th f x ~od r fer to do estic neturcd lcohol u d !n th operation of industries nd not to denatur d alco ol to e used rely as n !n r d nt in th • anufact re of anot r product.

0 old oth x ~0 •ld nd r u .. tory d ithout ct on 12'7 of th Tax Cod f r •t nden· bl t anuf ctur of d c·n 1, t o let nd oth r t ons e du tr • s.

·n enact ng s ct ons 127 ncl 28c ld not nv in .end to pon t X n ct on, only to

X

pt th fo1lo ng ct on.

t 8 c d al ul f •nt r e• t tion that prov onr. of 1 ~ hould ·ntcrpretcd such n r s to a on ze t ' th other pr • vi ons.

d sf vor ho cl oreover, x ptions fro t xat on r h a and ust b s r etly c nstrued. I st abl to u t fy h~s c 1 ly y th cleare t r nt of organ c or tut 1 • ( ol• lector vs.

an la Jockoy

ub, nc., 3 o •• 37 2;

n y 1 ctr c ·o. v • Col ctor, G.

•

o. L• 753, July 30, 1955.}

Th

t•t oner furth r ues th~t th n !nter• pretat on ven by the r apond nt to ect!on 127 nd 659 nil - C. T . A. C !..':JE • 182 - 1 - 128 of t e Tax Code should not be given retroactiv ef f ct .

It cl ims that for the 1 t t enty (20) y ers it h d en relying on t he previous ru11n s and pormits of t e · eau of Int rna1 ev nu 1 and conse u tJy, it di d not t ke nto cons derat on the a n~ of s e- ~ 1£ ic tax 1n its s le of tf e c nlly donatur ( ~1c ohol to the diffe ent r nt es of r mits nnd n ·:s s le o its •Jai ... This b n 1c hol to the con~u ng publ, c • est •on of t r r not m1 a n!strat ve officer is oiJnd y the previous ruliilgs of h · s pr d - cessor ·n off ce ha lr the upre e ourt in of Int rn 1 ev nue and b y n squ rely d c ed of H 1 do vs. ollector ourt of x App als (53 0 •• 2 1 ).

nc , t shall suff c to ~1ot from s d de- cision h applicabl rul "ng of th Co rt · 1 order to i p t!on r:~ of h present cont n on of th p ti- • .-nen th in 19 7 th t e pt and t o r due or tutes of re ched in 1 24 d"d not ex 660 v.

5 t x.

DEC lSI .T.A.

• 182 - 11 - • point w s decided in this wav tanford n!vers1ty o store, 29· .T.A., 12801 affd. , 8 ed.

2 ) 7lo.•• (Southern &ryland gricul• tural_ 1r ssoct•t1on v. Co ts- sioner of Internal evenue.

.I •• , ~9, ~. )

And as to the retroactive ef ect that ay e g!v n to a new nter retat!on o eo struet on ot a tax law, th Supre Court in th •• case •a! a lth r to the c ntent• n that n- e.ral r .cular ~o.

• 139 c nnot g1v n retro• active effect because that woul affect and o literate the vast d r g t acquired y p t • tioner under the prevlous ctrcular, suffice !t to say that neral Circular o. V- 123, having n ,issued on a ong construction of the la , c nno give r i se o a vested right t at can invoked by a t x yer .

r e re on is v ousa a ve ted 1 t cannot spr g fro a wro g in• terpr t tlon.

h s too cl to requir elaoorat1on.

oreover, the prevlo s interpretation of ec 1 ns 127 and 128 of t e ax ode having en de ermined to erroneou& eco s a nullity.

n as tween t e taxpayer nd the ver t , the taxpayer cannot plea the void act of official to shield htm ro nd of t vernaent that h pay t e lawful apeci ic tax t at is nda le and clue fr h • The nt can neither estopped nor prejudiced by the ille al acts of its servants.

(Govern nt v.

larosa, 36 h 1.

, 7.)

, in v e of the foregoing considerations, the decision of the respon nt ollector of Internal •· venue assessing • atnat and de anding fr the petitioner La To de a, . , the pa nt of the su of 268, 153.73 as spec fie tax on the denatu alcohol t produced 661 • 2 - 12 - during the per od fro July, 1951 to ay, 1954, incl u• sive, is here y affir , n the ti !on r is hereby ordered t o pay the &a!

ount to th re&pondent .

Ho ve • th r spect to th position of t penalty in t he u of 10, , the sa e e1n pur ly penal 1n natura, th1 Court h no juri diet on ov r t e •• • 4667. )

I C

( llada -vs.

urt of Tax App al&, et al., 1th co&t a g !nat t h petitioner. anil • Phil ppines, ec & ..

~LI

ocl te Judge r 16, 19~7 .

i s t s in a & par t op·n ion.

662 2 o. •

REPUBLIC OF THR PHILIPPINES

OURT OF TAX APPEALS

MANILA

LA TONDEDA, INC. , Petitioner, xXeuwaeweese es «# « «= «= EF

DISSENTING OPINION

I dissent. 1 cannot subseribe to the view thet rubbing alcohol, 4 medicinal preperation manufactured ~ out of denatured alcohol, is tamable st the same rates ag alcoholic drinks. Because of the limitation inpesed upen this Court by Section 13 of Republic Act oe. 1125, I am unable te write a more extended cpinion, but 1 shall do se st the proper time. For the present, i shall explain briefly three salient peints in support of my view.

The first point I shovld like to emphasize is the wording ef the lew itself. Section 133 of the Revenue Code imposes a specific tax om distilled spixits, the amount of the tax depending upen the kind of materials used in the manufacture thereof. ‘ection 127 imposes the seme tax previded in Section 133 on medicinal pre- paretions, flevoring extracts, and sll other prepara~ tions, except teilet preparations, of which, excluding weter, distilled spirits form the chief ingredient. And Section 126 exempts from the specific tax pres- cribed in Section 133 domestic alcehol ef not less than ene hundred eighty degrees proof when such alcohol is

J

663 via o2-« denatured and removed from the distillery or bonded warehouse for the purpese cf being used for fuel, or light, or fer use generally in the arts and industries. Section 3 of Republic Act Me. 1608 has broadened the exemption so as to include denatured alcoho) for use in hespitals, saniteria, and clinics, or for research or experimental purposes, ox for the officiel use of the Government ef the Republic of the Philippines or its instrumentalities cr political subdivisions.

A careful enalysis of Sections 127, 126 and 133 will readily show thet the lew clascifies aleohel and alcoholic products inte three categories, viz:

1. epepiias coirtse. eptensine So home te eleohelic liquors which are taxeble aan toate 134 and 125;

% Megisiea) pxanarationss © pone Ae: me ons @ preparations, containing distilled spirites % Rengiunad plese, tot ete ete od ee or use y in the arts and in- dustfies.

The first cless, referring to distilled sririis, is taxeble under Section 133. Odistilled spirits under this class are those intended for elcchelic beversges.

The second elase geverned by Section 127, is of three kinds: (a) medicinal prepsrations, flavoring extracts, and all other preparations, of hich, exclud- ing water, distilled spirits form the chief ingredient;

i The enendnent, intzodesed by Sus. 3» Rap. sot 65.2 aa

DISSENTING CPIMIGH <

CeToAs Case No. 162 -3-<

(b) preparaticns cf which distilled spirits is not the chief ingredient; and (¢) toilet preparations. Hedici- nal preparations, flavoring extracts, and all other preparations, of which, excluding water, distilled spirits form the chief ingredient, are taxable at the seme rates as distilled spirits under Section 133. if the seue articles de not contain distilled spirits os the chief ingredient, they are subject to the sales tax cf 7% under Section 166. Toilet preparations, irrespective of alcohol content, are subject to the sales tex of 30% undez Section 144, The third class, referring to denatured alcohol for use as fwel or liont, or for use generally in the arts end industries, are tsyable under Section 142 (aleehol fox motive power) and Section 16 (denatured alcohol used for light or in the arts and industries).

We are here concerned selely with the taxebility ef rubbing alcohol, admittedly a medicinal preperstion manufactured by petitioner cut of denatured alcohol. It is the centention of respondent that rubbing alcohcl, being « medicinal preparation of which distilled spiaits is the chief ingredient, is taxable under Section 133 in relation te Section 127. On the other hand, peti- tioner cleims that it is texeble under Section 186 in Felation to Section 128.

1 agree with petitioner that rubbing sicehel manufactured cut cf denatured alechol is taxable under Section 186. in order that rubbing alcohol, as a medi- cinel preperation, bay be subject te tax under Section 133 in relation to Section 127, it is essential that ‘57 669

DISSENTING CPIRICN «

w~4e the alcehei used be gintilied snizrita and not denatured alcohol. Note thet Section 127 uses the term “djs- killed spiziis’. 25 distinguished from the term “ge- Detured alcohol” used in Section 128 Since the law has separately cleseified articles containing digtilied Snixits es the chief ingredient frem denatured elsoho) used generally in incustries, and imposes different rates of taxes on each cless, thet classification must be respected.

It 43 contended that as a medicinal preparation rubbing alechel is expressly classified in Seeticn 177 and not in Section 128 This interpretation overlooks the essential reeufresent thet « medicine] rreparetion must contain distilled svirites #9 the chief ingredient in order to be taxable under Seetion 193. If it was the intention of the levislature to tax 411 medicinal prepsrations containing alechol, whether denatured or net, as the chief ingredient, it should have sco ex~- pressly provided in Section 177. nm the ether hand, although Section 198 does not mention expressly the term “medicinal preporations® it mskes mention ef deo netured zicohel used in industry. It ecannet he denied thet the sanufscture of tebbing alechel ian an industry. Therefore, cenetured slechol used in the manufecture ef rubbing elcenel is denstured leone) used jp in- dustry end is texable under Section 186 in relation to Section 128.

There i¢ a valid resson for the distinction aade by lew between articles containing distilled spirits as the chief ingredient and articles manufactured out GH?

Cc et ne AB es eee ET eae — ates ee - —— — ot are

DISSENTING CPINICH «

C.T.Ae Cose No. 182 o$- of denatured alcohol. And this is the second peint te which 1 referred earlier in this epinien. The law imposing specific tax on distilled spirits or alechelic beverages is beth for revenue and for regulation, acre for revenue. Nedicinal prepsratione certeining dis- tilled rpirits, net denetured, se chief ingredient must _ have te be texed at the seme rates as distilled spirits intended fer beverages to prevent evesion of the high rates of tex on such articles. Medicine] preparetions containing distilled sririts +s chief ingredient could be used as substitute for alcecholic beverages. The Same cannet be said ef medicinal preparstions manuf ac- tured out of denatured alcohel. They aze peisencus. It is not possible to convert denetured alcohel inte alcoholic beverasces to evade payment of the corres- ponding specific tax considering the rigid requiations governing denaturing, which is aetuslly dene by 2 com- mittee crested by the Collector of internal Sevenue and composed of men mainly coming from the Bureau cf Internal Revenue. The conversicn couid probably be done, but considering the high cost it would be cheaper te pay the specific tax. There is, therefore, no valid reeson for placing medicinal preparations on the same level, fer tox purposes, a¢ distilied spirits intend- ed for alcoholit beverages.

Could it nave been the intention of the legis- lature te imose the sane high rates of specific tax on wedicinel preperations centaining denatured elechol as on distilled spirits for alcoholic beversges” ‘Sure~ ly, the legislature could not have intended tc reoulate bd 667 }

DISSENTING CPINION «

CeTeAe CASE NO. 162 «6 « traffic in medicinal preperations which can net be used a¢ 2 substitute for intoxicating beverages in the same menrer that it hes slways sought to requlete traf<- fic in intexieating beverages.

Finally, 1 misht alse mention the fact that the execpticn from srecific tax of medicinal preparations mnenufsctured out of denatured alechol, and the taxa- tion thereef under the sales tax previsions, has been the consistent practice of the Bureau of Internal Ke- venue for about half a century, if I om net mistaken, and was interrupted only sometime in 1954 when the present assessment wes alepped against herein petitioner.

A practice consistently followed end adhered te reli- giously fer such a long peried cannet be lightly dis- regarded. it is reasensble te suprose thet 2@ leng standing practice of an executive department, if con- trary te the intention of the legislature, would be i epecificaliy cerrected by the legislative department.

(1 USTC, Por. 259: see alse 1 USTC, Par. 203.) Congress Sought te correct whet it ecnsidered an erroneous ine terpretation of the Collector of Internal Sevenve in helding that vessels were subject to the soles tax er compensating tex by enacting Republic Act Ne. 361; | it alse enected Republic Acts Nos. 894 and 1612 pur- pertedly te correct an erreneous ruling that articles shipped abroed where title te the erticles pessed to the foreign buyers within Philippine jurisdiction were subject to the sales tax; end it alse sought te correct a suppesed erroneous interpretation in regard

Cu

668 wale

DISSENTING OPINTICH ~

CeTehe Case Noe 182

~T-

to the texsbility of cement by enacting Sepublic Act No. 1999. These circumstances indicate that if Cong ress is dissatiafied with a standing practice, it enacts legislation to correct it. The fact that Congress has net amended the law relating to denatured zlecho! as interpreted end sdrinistered by the Bureau ef Inter- nel Revemse for helf 0 century gives rise to a strong presumption that the practice nes received congressicnal approval.

FOR THE FORKGOING CONSIDSRATIONS, it is my opi- nion that beth the letter and the spirit of the low argue most strongly against the position taken by res- pendent, and, therefore, the decision apresled from should be reversed.

As agen rat mM. UNALT

Associate Judge

yelF 669 ee ae oe eee a eit gs) ene ras ge aE oi ania. wade tig se tr, ens Pesaro. ates ais” ep